Everton's rescheduled clash with Aston Villa won't now being going ahead this weekend after the Premier League agreed to postpone the fixture following the Covid-19 outbreak at the Midlands club.
The game had been moved from this Saturday to Sunday 17 January as the entire Villa first team have been self-isolating and the club's training ground wasn't scheduled to re-open until the 16th.
Nine Villa players and five of their backroom staff have tested positive for the virus, which meant that the club had to field a raft of youth players in last Friday's FA Cup game against Liverpool. With matches against Manchester City and Newcastle having already been postponed, Dean Smith's team will have played three fewer than the majority of clubs in the Premier League until they face the Magpies on 23 January.
No date has been set for Aston Villa vs Everton but the Blues' FA Cup tie against Sheffield Wednesday has been set for Sunday 24 January.
The Yorkshire club has been affected by the coronavirus as well and have been forced to call off their next two games in the Championship but they will now play Everton in front of the BT Sport cameras in 10 days' time.
Reader Comments (193)
Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer
1 Posted 14/01/2021 at 10:01:02
I can see us being forced to play three times a week later in the season to play our rearranged fixtures. Probably during an injury crisis. That would be so Everton.
2 Posted 14/01/2021 at 10:21:49
Can't they train on any available pitch in the Birmingham area and work on tactics there? Is it not possible they can use any indoor room with a blackboard to describe set plays? Send them home for their dinner and bring them back in the afternoon if they want?
I wonder if Marine, Crawley and the rest of the lower league can call off games because they don't have the luxuries of Premier League standard training grounds?
No wonder people are falling out of love with footy when these pampered overpaid arseholes can't play because their training ground is closed...
3 Posted 14/01/2021 at 10:32:21
Villa have had their wish and this game is cancelled. Everton should be awarded the points. The Football League and the Premier League need to postpone all games for 2 weeks. There cannot be an unfair fixture pile-up for some teams. 2 Everton games cancelled, not by Everton.
4 Posted 14/01/2021 at 10:33:46
It annoys me that our two games that got postponed – numerous Man City and Aston Villa stars broke lockdown rules throughout.
Fair enough if it absolutely has to be cancelled but dock them the points and let the clubs have some accountability or at least launch an investigation. Both times, the postponements have disrupted our momentum.
5 Posted 14/01/2021 at 10:36:45
The odds seem to be stacked against the Blues, we just don't seem to get the breaks other teams get.
6 Posted 14/01/2021 at 10:37:38
Just plain weird.
7 Posted 14/01/2021 at 10:47:28
Fact is, fixture pile-ups were a regular thing back in the 70s. Though, of course, there were less games for the big clubs then which mitigated it slightly. It's unfortunate that we've been on the wrong end of two postponements, while the Shite pretty much got a bye in the Cup, but twas ever thus.
Anyway, I don't really know what my point is. Fuck everyone, up the Toffees?
8 Posted 14/01/2021 at 11:03:12
9 Posted 14/01/2021 at 11:04:56
In an already compressed season this means we will no doubt end up having to play at times that may not suit us as well as if the games had taken place when they should. This, in turn, might well impact on our final league placing this season.
10 Posted 14/01/2021 at 11:08:34
If this virus isn't going away, there needs to be common sense around asymptomatic players and those who are not sick at all. Or we could still be playing this season during the Euros.
11 Posted 14/01/2021 at 11:18:30
12 Posted 14/01/2021 at 11:19:18
Personally I'd shelve the Euros to be honest, it's asking to much to play it this summer.
Nothing will wind me up more than seeing another fuckin pointless international break in March, costing two weeks of Premier League football matches just to watch teams play at snails pace England v Gibraltar or whoever.
13 Posted 14/01/2021 at 11:19:22
We used to play 42 games in Division 1. League Cup ties were over two legs. FA Cup games went to replays. No extra time and pens. All this with 12 players to choose from on matchdays. The squad was around 24 or 25 players.
Today's footballer has it easy.
14 Posted 14/01/2021 at 11:21:15
As it stands, he will miss Leicester. This is due to cards not carrying over to other competitions apparently.
Maybe someone more in the know can clarify!
15 Posted 14/01/2021 at 11:23:43
Totally the correct decision.
16 Posted 14/01/2021 at 11:25:42
But – cummon some of you! Less of the 'woe is me'. We are hardly likely to face a fixture pile-up. By contrast, the teams we now have to re-schedule games against – Villa and City – most certainly will. Ergo, it could work in our favour.
As things stand, we are one of 13 clubs that has played 17 games. Only 3 clubs – Wolves, Brighton and Sheffield Utd – have played more, 18 each. Two teams – City and Burnley – have played 16. Villa are dragging up the rear with just 15 games played.
The greater risk IMO is if the Covid-19 numbers continue to rise – especially within football clubs – then ALL fixtures could be suspended. Then it is anybody's guess in an already congested year how the football calendar can be re-arranged, but we haven't come to that yet.
17 Posted 14/01/2021 at 11:26:27
They players should just catch Covid, fuckin' pussies.
18 Posted 14/01/2021 at 11:27:14
19 Posted 14/01/2021 at 11:28:09
20 Posted 14/01/2021 at 11:30:10
21 Posted 14/01/2021 at 11:30:14
One does have to wonder how Liverpool got a bye in the Cup, with sympathetic headlines and when Everton celebrate a goal, social distance celebrations become that weeks Media theme and probably an influence on a future related Premier League announcement.
I don't think a postponed game suits an Everton side that mainly builds on what they are coached, on the hoof. It normally takes them the game after the restart to get back up to speed.
22 Posted 14/01/2021 at 11:40:09
That's so Everton that. The world's against us, they must have just made that ruling up when they cancelled the Villa game.
23 Posted 14/01/2021 at 11:43:01
24 Posted 14/01/2021 at 11:45:45
I don't think its an anti-Everton conspiracy, my complaint is that the Premier League said at the very beginning of the season that NO game would be called off if a team had 14 fit players. Great so everybody knows the rules, but then Newcastle have some cases of Covid 19 and they close their training ground, and the game with Villa is postponed. So the Premier League have now decided to ditch their own rules, with no explanation why?
So we now have Sheffield Utd who according to their manager Chris Wilder said they had a couple of players with Covid but didn't call their league game off. Yet City with 4 players with Covid got there game postponed. So there are now no rules and the Premier League will make decisions on the hoof.
25 Posted 14/01/2021 at 11:53:53
It is what it is.
26 Posted 14/01/2021 at 11:55:24
I am sure Villa fans are annoyed / disappointed too, especially having to effectively forfeit the FA Cup putting out a second or third team.
Completely the right decision in this instance.
27 Posted 14/01/2021 at 11:57:04
I know you want to be assured that everyone is being treated the same... but I suspect situations are fluid and the "one rule for all" mentality simply fails when every case is unlikely to be the same.
None of us are privy to the full details of every decision – even the haughty powers of Everton FC don't seem to have been given the courtesy of an explanation about the Man City postponement, which is where all this conspiracy nonsense started.
28 Posted 14/01/2021 at 12:10:18
It shows that, despite the best efforts of the clubs, many Premier League footballers are not complying with social distancing.
If it gets any worse, I can definitely see the government intervening and suspending the league again.
29 Posted 14/01/2021 at 12:15:09
But would you put it past teams to work this in their favour?
Just say our red cousins were to get Mane and Salah banned for a match against Man Utd... you don't think anyone would consider playing the COVID card?
It seems obvious to me to put International and European games on hold. Solves the problem of fixture congestion and excessive travel during a pandemic in one move. I'll bet it won't happen though - too much money in the CL.
30 Posted 14/01/2021 at 12:18:36
Expecting footballers to be immune is just naive. Worst still is thinking they are invincible. Look at the newcastle lad, Saint-Maximim - he's been out for like 7 weeks and no projected return to fitness. Ocassionally this can really destroy a person. It can have serious impacts on a players lungs - pretty important parts of the body one thinks.
The game should be suspended for the forseeable.
31 Posted 14/01/2021 at 12:26:49
Paranoid............ you bet!!
32 Posted 14/01/2021 at 12:27:32
Whilst other teams plough through a congested Christmas/January fixture list and most of our main rivals for league positions will soon be back playing European football we now get to spread our fixtures out a bit more to our own convenience.
33 Posted 14/01/2021 at 12:33:45
We are well into a second/third wave that looks worse than the first, and it is affecting not just Premier League players, not just lockdown breakers, not just people in certain parts of England... but seemingly everywhere. And that's despite all the mask-wearing, all the social distancing, all the tiers, all the lockdowns. The only thing that seems to work is total isolation at the borders — but not if it's already rampant inland.
Meanwhile, China's trade surplus reaches an all-time high – despite Trump's (failed) campaign to kick 'em in the nuts these last four years... And the lab in Wuhan is finally being investigated by WHO.
34 Posted 14/01/2021 at 12:56:41
35 Posted 14/01/2021 at 13:00:40
Now we have this ludicrous decision to prevent players celebrating a goal. These are the same players that train every day with each other, travel together. Players who come into contact with players of other teams throughout the game, tackle each other, push, shove and hold each other at dead ball situations. Absolute nonsense. A last-minute winner against the RS at Anfield is not to be celebrated?
We've already got VAR ruining the game now these Covid decisions are just turning the screw. Pointless going on... we should just call it quits.
36 Posted 14/01/2021 at 13:00:51
37 Posted 14/01/2021 at 13:03:34
38 Posted 14/01/2021 at 13:13:26
Also, club coaches, managers, physios. Also, players have parents, wives etc. Some may have as yet unknown underlying issues. (Callum Robinson at Fulham had a move to Milan cancelled due to a heart issue they identified.)
39 Posted 14/01/2021 at 13:14:21
If you are happy with games being called off and then rearranged and the backlog it will create, then fine. Personally, anything they can do to minimise transition but keep football going, then please do it.
At least making my Fantasy Football picks provides a welcome distraction from not being able to go anywhere or do anything. How sad is that? If that was taken away because too many games are cancelled because of this pandemic, I'm not sure what I am going to do to distract from the monotony. I can't talk to the wife as she is too busy watching rubbish like Married at First Sight!
I genuinely don't understand why anyone has a problem with asking players to not do it. It isn't exactly a big deal in the grand scheme of things.
40 Posted 14/01/2021 at 13:30:05
If we score a last-minute winner against the enemy, I would hug a stall-holder in the Wuhan wet market!
41 Posted 14/01/2021 at 13:34:25
Footballers are tested regularly and are triple low risk, first of catching the virus, secondly actually being ill from it, and then thirdly actually dying from it, so their actions are not as terrible as is being made out.
42 Posted 14/01/2021 at 13:47:17
Firstly, false positives do not amount to 90% of all cases.
Secondly, some footballers actually have had the virus. Two Newcastle players suffered long-term effects, one is still ill 7 weeks after contracting it. Also, our own Micheal Keane described the debilitating effects it had on him.
Finally, you can have the virus with no symptoms. Has all the talk of asymptomatic carriers escaped your notice?
Honestly, please get yourself better informed before pronouncing on this disease.
43 Posted 14/01/2021 at 13:54:53
The postponement is irritating but no more than that. It means we will likely have Allan and DCL available when it is rearranged. As others have said Villa face a greater backlog.
It is a very tetchy football world at present. Scott Parker was annoyed that Fulhams game at Spurs was rearranged at short notice. José Mourinho was annoyed that Scott Parker was annoyed. Everton were apparently annoyed when our game with City was called off at short notice. Guardiola was very annoyed that Everton asked for an explanation as to why his club sought the postponement.
People are annoyed that players are hugging each other when a goal is scored. Guardiola thinks that is unavoidable, failing to recognise the obvious point that the game is in the Governments sights as the next area to be closed down. The Premier League needs to do everything within its power to prevent that happening. The notion that it is too much to require players not to hug after putting the ball in the net is a little ridiculous.
44 Posted 14/01/2021 at 13:55:05
45 Posted 14/01/2021 at 14:00:29
46 Posted 14/01/2021 at 14:08:46
Put up links to all your claims or your posts will be removed.
47 Posted 14/01/2021 at 14:13:58
48 Posted 14/01/2021 at 14:14:07
We're all behind you, Rob!!
49 Posted 14/01/2021 at 14:18:57
A post on Facebook makes a number of claims about the Covid-19 pandemic, centring on the assertion that Covid-19 tests do not test for Covid-19 specifically, but any coronavirus, including ones which cause “nothing more than cold/flu like symptoms”. (Some coronaviruses cause what we know of as the common cold.) This is false. As we have written about extensively here, the diagnostic test used in the UK is called a PCR (polymerase chain reaction) test, which looks for the viruss genetic material to see if someone currently has Covid-19. The Facebook post questions the reliability of PCR tests and there is something in this. PCR tests can sometimes indicate that someone does not have the virus when they do (false negative). They can also indicate that someone has the virus when they dont (false positive). Its hard to say how many false negatives and positives PCR tests produce, but in general, these tests are “highly accurate”. Most importantly, what a PCR test wont do is misinterpret the presence of other coronaviruses as the presence of the virus which causes Covid-19, as this post claims. The possibility that a test might pick up related viruses that have genetic similarities to the virus youre looking for (technically known as “cross-reactivity”) is something that is looked at when designing PCR tests. For example, one of the earliest PCR testing protocols, which was published on 13 January, specifically checked that the test did not pick up the four human coronaviruses that cause infections including the common cold. Results for a range of available PCR tests show that they do not cross-react with any viruses analysed, including other coronaviruses. Where some of the confusion might have come about is because of the accuracy of antibody tests. The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says: “There is a chance that a positive result means you have antibodies from an infection with a different virus from the same family of viruses.”
This is false.
As we have written about extensively here, the diagnostic test used in the UK is called a PCR (polymerase chain reaction) test, which looks for the viruss genetic material to see if someone currently has Covid-19.
The Facebook post questions the reliability of PCR tests and there is something in this.
PCR tests can sometimes indicate that someone does not have the virus when they do (false negative). They can also indicate that someone has the virus when they dont (false positive).
Its hard to say how many false negatives and positives PCR tests produce, but in general, these tests are “highly accurate”.
Most importantly, what a PCR test wont do is misinterpret the presence of other coronaviruses as the presence of the virus which causes Covid-19, as this post claims.
The possibility that a test might pick up related viruses that have genetic similarities to the virus youre looking for (technically known as “cross-reactivity”) is something that is looked at when designing PCR tests.
For example, one of the earliest PCR testing protocols, which was published on 13 January, specifically checked that the test did not pick up the four human coronaviruses that cause infections including the common cold.
Results for a range of available PCR tests show that they do not cross-react with any viruses analysed, including other coronaviruses.
Where some of the confusion might have come about is because of the accuracy of antibody tests. The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says: “There is a chance that a positive result means you have antibodies from an infection with a different virus from the same family of viruses.”
50 Posted 14/01/2021 at 14:22:56
51 Posted 14/01/2021 at 14:23:48
52 Posted 14/01/2021 at 14:25:54
I demand a re-count.
53 Posted 14/01/2021 at 14:26:30
The test only discovers viral or bacterial activity?? I thought Covid WAS a virus.
54 Posted 14/01/2021 at 14:27:25
No professional footballer or athlete in Uk has died due to covid Out of the total deaths 388, without underlying health issues, of them were under the age of 60. Goes down to less than 50 deaths under the age of 40 with same criteria.
As I said, not trivialising the issue. 388 is 388 too many
My point is, fit healthy sportsmen and women should be allowed to crack on provided they shield their elderly and vulnerable family and friends. Don't go anywhere near them.
Whether you could trust some of the modern-day footballers to do that is another story.
55 Posted 14/01/2021 at 14:29:06
56 Posted 14/01/2021 at 14:34:39
57 Posted 14/01/2021 at 14:34:53
Hospitals are reporting that there is a pretty big increase in younger age groups being hospitalised.
By some counts, the UK passed 100,000 Covid-19 deaths yesterday, an incredible and emotive figure, and this, and a poor government blaming everybody but themselves, is, I guess, the reason for this postponement. The Calvert-Lewin probably felt they had no other choice.
58 Posted 14/01/2021 at 14:38:46
The BMJ has published a study that casts serious doubt on the concept of asymptomatic transmission. I'll find you the link. Nobody has proven that it does take place (asymptomatic transmission of other Corona viruses has never been a thing), yet somehow the government has come up with this number that we should act as though 1 in 3 of us has it and can pass it on. In the same breath, Neil "ratface" Ferguson tells us that no more than 20% of the population has been infected yet, so I wonder which is it...?!
Personally, I know nobody where I live in Oxfordshire who has had it since July, and I mix with people of all ages. I'm very sceptical as to where all these tens of thousands of daily cases are actually coming from...
Michael #49 - the key thing missed from that article is the issue of PCR thermal cycles. The problem with PCR is that, if more than 35 thermal cycles are used to amplify the presence of ribonucleic acid unique to the covid virus, the test can generate a positive result, but that positive outcome fails then to take account of the fact that that person may have a very low viral load and may well not be infectious.
For whatever reason, 40-45 thermal cycles is the norm in Europe, even though the inventor of PCR said you should not use more than 35 and said, as Martin correctly points out, that it should not be used as the sole diagnostic method in a mass testing programme. There should either be a second, confirmatory test or an in person clinical diagnosis.
You only need to look at how the positivity numbers fell away in Liverpool with the PCR + lateral flow mass testing programme for evidence...
The fact so many footballers are "catching" covid will likely be as a result of overly sensitive, frequent PCR testing. If it isn't, then it goes to show that lockdowns and all the other rules are no match for a virus, which will spread in spite of all that!
59 Posted 14/01/2021 at 14:40:24
60 Posted 14/01/2021 at 14:44:34
Seriously though, there does appear to be many conflicting opinions and valid on both sides of the argument but really, how difficult is it to wear a mask in public or maintain social distancing until everyone has been vaccinated?
Sports is employment, like any other business and, as long as guidelines are followed, they should carry on. People have bills to pay and families to feed.
They don't all have big bank accounts like Trump.
61 Posted 14/01/2021 at 14:44:48
62 Posted 14/01/2021 at 14:52:39
Is that wrong?
63 Posted 14/01/2021 at 14:53:51
Maybe this appears to be selfish? Thats what Dyche also said, but its giving people a purpose, it will stop a lot of money on all this constant testing, and unless they are thinking of shutting footy down, then it probably makes the most sense?
My guess is that at least 40% of footballers would be reluctant to get this vaccine, but I might be wrong, even it just seems that giving these players a vaccination, makes the most sense.
64 Posted 14/01/2021 at 15:21:02
The UK media has deteriorated immensely over the last decade or so and the total absence of coverage of the spectrum of professional opinion on Covid matters has been perhaps its greatest dereliction of duty in recent times.
65 Posted 14/01/2021 at 15:31:08
66 Posted 14/01/2021 at 15:32:27
Frankly, when you see them abused by idiots like Trump, they are downright dangerous!
67 Posted 14/01/2021 at 15:52:02
68 Posted 14/01/2021 at 15:54:57
We seem to be infested by celebrities giving their often ill-informed opinions on all matters related to humankind.
69 Posted 14/01/2021 at 16:11:57
Let's just keep ToffeeWeb to football and all things Everton related, up the toffees and some rest for our small squad...
70 Posted 14/01/2021 at 16:21:08
You denied it when I asked. But I think you just let that cat slip out of the bag.
That letter went viral. The Fiver talked about it for two days. Stand up and represent, man. You should be proud.
71 Posted 14/01/2021 at 16:24:14
I can't speak for Crawley, but it appears that Marine's FA Cup event with Spurs might just have been their final game this season. Last I heard, their league is shut down indefinitely.
72 Posted 14/01/2021 at 16:26:22
73 Posted 14/01/2021 at 16:29:42
The virus is spreading. The new variant is spreading particularly quickly. And many, many people are dying. Infection statistics are very hard to interpret, and there's still a lot to learn about both the virus and the vaccines, but any suggestion that the numbers are highly inflated and the risks exaggerated is irresponsible and dangerous.
74 Posted 14/01/2021 at 16:37:09
This weekend the US death toll will surpass 400,000.
75 Posted 14/01/2021 at 16:38:08
Had they played those games and potentially lost them, then they may be more conservative in the transfer window. Conversely, if the EPL suddenly have Villa play four games in a week or something, it also becomes an integrity issue to their detriment. Either way, it's problematic.
With that having been said, I am in favor of postponing because of the health risks and in my view those matters trump sporting integrity. But I am just illustrating how this pandemic can influence not just the scheduling of the season but the potential outcomes.
76 Posted 14/01/2021 at 16:45:09
77 Posted 14/01/2021 at 16:51:41
78 Posted 14/01/2021 at 16:51:57
The criteria has now been changed to any death within 60 days of a positive test.
79 Posted 14/01/2021 at 16:58:57
I was thinking of logging on to the NHS forum to see how the rumours about our January transfer window were coming along.
80 Posted 14/01/2021 at 17:04:02
There is nothing fair about any of this.
81 Posted 14/01/2021 at 17:04:47
My colleague's next door neighbour in Winchester (15 miles from Southampton) fell really ill with Covid-19 on Christmas Eve. Nearest bed in an ICU available was York! The reason it is an issue is because they don't have enough beds for us to carry on as normal.
Your claims are baseless, without fact, the same that most of the right-wing gutter press on Twitter cite as fact. Toby Young for example.
Even taking the Newcastle case you mention, Saint Maximin in particular was hit really hard with it and is still not back training. There is strong evidence I am sure that the virus in particular has strong effects on the BAME community; given the number of black players playing professionally, it needs to be taken seriously.
I'm shocked that there are people out there that spout this nonsense when it can be proven very easily they are wrong.
82 Posted 14/01/2021 at 17:09:02
This site has the numbers within 28 days. Not seen anyone say within 60 days myself for a long time?
83 Posted 14/01/2021 at 17:09:14
I didn't know anybody who had Covid-19 in the 1st & 2nd lockdowns but this one is very different. Many friends throughout Merseyside and Manchester have it and many are very poorly.
The missus and I now have it and have been waylaid for nearly a fortnight now and we have been obeying all of the protocols. So, whether you know nobody in Oxfordshire (rural?) or not, this new strain is certainly taking a grip up here.
84 Posted 14/01/2021 at 17:12:05
Even worse distortion of facts if that is the case.
I can safely say,with 100% accuracy, not EVERY death recorded is due to Covid.
As mentioned several times above. More clarity is needed.
Some people are terrified; they need factually correct information, not scaring.
85 Posted 14/01/2021 at 17:19:20
'Hot and heavy goal celebrations have got the curtain-twitchers antsy'.
Not out of place on ToffeeWeb.
86 Posted 14/01/2021 at 17:21:48
87 Posted 14/01/2021 at 17:23:23
I agree and I wasn't intending to trivialize the serious issues by bringing up the sport, I was just illustrating how the pandemic has so many effects: some deeply serious; some (eg, sport) inconvenient.
To Tony Abraham's point on Sean Dyche. I think it's an interesting point. Morally, it seems perverse to prioritize sportsman being vaccinated ahead of higher-risk individuals. But, since the outset, the government seemed to have felt that it's important to the national psyche to keep the Premier League going at all costs.
I suppose, in the absence of strong religious observance in a secular society, football is a religion of sorts, filling a void in people's lives. If it is that important to the national morale, then I think they should vaccinate the players.
But personally, I don't think it is that important. I would have preferred to have a typical Christmas etc with family than watch a bunch of Premier League games.
88 Posted 14/01/2021 at 17:27:29
89 Posted 14/01/2021 at 17:34:48
The cause of death is Covid-19. Many have underlying health problems... but, if it were not for Covid-19, they would still be alive. And young people can suffer from it.
It's more than deaths: long Covid is a serious issue. My sister is still coughing. She's a marathon runner, in her thirties, and a nurse. Got Covid in April, could barely walk for a month. No taste or smell for 6 weeks plus. Still got a heavy chest. She's okay. She can still run and is fit... thank god, but if she was a professional athlete, I'd imagine her performance would be greatly diminished and would have missed a lot of football.
Other cases of long Covid put it at 1 in 4 with symptoms months after initial infection.
If a professional footballer sees their lung capacity functionality impacted, they are unlikely to be able to play at the highest level.
This is real. With the different strains now coming from South America another threat. It is madness to say 'Keep Calm and Carry On'.
We have the light at the end of the tunnel in the vaccines. Why risk fucking it all up?
90 Posted 14/01/2021 at 17:37:05
Now we are in a situation where nothing is normal so our games could be in doubt weekly.
God knows how Villa seem to have more problems than most sides?
91 Posted 14/01/2021 at 17:37:36
On the football side of things, why was Villa forced to play their cup tie against Liverpool with a weakened team, but they don't have to play a league game? It may be because there may be a fresh outbreak involving their 1st team squad. Now I am wondering is this an advantage or a disadvantage to Everton who according to reports do not have to play until the end of January.
The advantage may be in getting some of our injured players back, I think the disadvantage is in lack of match practice, this was shown with Digne in his 2 games back.
What do other supporters think?
92 Posted 14/01/2021 at 17:45:32
Of course they're not 100% accurate. Almost no data sets are.
This is part of the problem with the media and science. The media and politicians exploit the fact that so few people understand science or statistics all the time.
But are you really suggesting there is less to worry about than the death count suggests? Really? I fear for all of you sceptics, but I fear more for the people who will suffer indirectly from the scepticism of others.
93 Posted 14/01/2021 at 17:47:14
94 Posted 14/01/2021 at 17:49:50
"Thomas Richards, you can ignore all the facts you want. You can believe that the Covid-19 deaths are are in fact all people dying as a result of car crashes or normal flu, or cancer or whatever – that is not the case."
I didn't say any of that in my posts.
95 Posted 14/01/2021 at 17:51:58
"But are you really suggesting there is less to worry about than the death count suggests?"
For young healthy people, most definitely yes.
96 Posted 14/01/2021 at 17:56:18
Vaccine rollout will help reduce its impact but timelines for each country mean the impact will most likely be with us globally for years to come.
The NHS has all but stopped everything other than Covid response because the resources to provide anything else are not there. And, even if they were, it's conjecture about their ability to cope.
Until this virus has run its course, the name of the game is self-protection and common sense. (As well as luck!) Sadly with many, there is an absence of all three.
Good luck to every one of you, your families and friends. We share the responsibility for all of us to do the best we can to stop the spread and reduce the impact. Stay safe – if not for yourself, then for those you love.
97 Posted 14/01/2021 at 17:57:32
Doucouré will now miss the Leicester game. This season, they changed the yellow card rule: Premier League yellows count for league games only.
98 Posted 14/01/2021 at 18:11:28
I can safely say,with 100% accuracy, not EVERY death recorded is due to Covid."
You basically inferred it.
And it's more than deaths. It can damage health (like with the Newcastle player)...and the long term damage we'll only know many years from now.
Long Covid is a problem. Imagine if DCL got.covid and as a result lost his capacity to run like he does. Or he has to take 6 months recovering? Or any player?
What if Ancelotti or other backroom staff get it and die or are forced to retire. Or as Ancelotti is over 60, does it not really count as a death.
99 Posted 14/01/2021 at 18:13:58
100 Posted 14/01/2021 at 18:13:59
Oh right then. Let them all go out and do what they want then. Who cares if that increases the risk of spreading it to the more vulnerable, eh? Oh wait. You don't believe that either. Despite the impact of schools and Universities being open etc. Despite the warnings of those who make a living studying this. With so few ICU beds left in many places, I don't know what else needs to happen before sceptics wake up. A lost cause, I guess.
101 Posted 14/01/2021 at 18:15:37
Thomas: "Even worse distortion of facts if that is the case. (In reference to the false assertion of deaths links to Covid up to 60 days post positive test") I can safely say, with 100% accuracy, not EVERY death recorded is due to Covid."
You basically inferred it.
That is a big leap from you. From my post to cancer, car crashes etc. You imagined I inferred it.
102 Posted 14/01/2021 at 18:20:20
If you take the time to read my posts earlier, you will see my thoughts on young people steering well clear of elderly or vulnerable family and friends.
103 Posted 14/01/2021 at 18:20:21
There is an element of truth in almost everything people are debating here, but much comes with the observation, so what? Like it or not, there is a collective and ultimately personal responsibility to make the best choices we can and not to opt out because of information overload.
104 Posted 14/01/2021 at 18:23:24
The year is compared to other known historical peaks in the rate such as the Great Wars and earlier flu pandemics.
The data cannot be denied. The 12 month mortality rate is one of the highest of all-time.
It is for each individual to consider what is the overriding factor that has caused such a sharp spike in recorded deaths.
I know what I lean towards.
105 Posted 14/01/2021 at 18:25:42
It is perhaps the most moving piece I have ever seen on television. Reflective, thoughtful and fully informed. So far from the brain dead utter loons who infect the internet with blasphemy.
106 Posted 14/01/2021 at 18:26:04
Here it is.
107 Posted 14/01/2021 at 18:27:16
For details of ICU patients, you could do worse than look at the report from the ICNARC (Critical Care Research Centre) on COVID admissions to critical care (September to January): https://www.icnarc.org/Our-Audit/Audits/Cmp/Reports
Their analysis identified that 73% of patients were under 70. Like with football, there is a lot of disinformation out there which makes things even worse.
108 Posted 14/01/2021 at 18:30:35
Or follow the FA Cup route where you have to field a team, even if it's the U23s. Not ideal, but might make clubs stricter with their players, ensuring they are following the rules.
Teams with injuries can buy some time, to get the game called off and even with a fixture pileup, could be worth the cancellation, if it means getting a few players back fully fit.
109 Posted 14/01/2021 at 18:32:09
110 Posted 14/01/2021 at 18:39:12
111 Posted 14/01/2021 at 18:39:24
112 Posted 14/01/2021 at 18:41:16
I have seen your posts. Yes, you comment once that there is an issue about the young passing the virus on. But that's not a clear explanation of your views, especially when you suggest the death rate is misleading and that the young shouldn't be so worried.
Firstly, the young and healthy can and do get seriously ill. In some cases, it's long term and we don't yet know how long symptoms will last. Secondly, the death rate may not be 100% accurate (how could it be?), but it is not misleading in the sense that people shouldn't be afraid.
This 'bit of a cold' bollocks is an insult to those of us who have suffered. Including the young and formerly healthy.
113 Posted 14/01/2021 at 18:48:15
A clear explanation of my views.
When I looked at ONS figures a couple of weeks ago, the mortality figure for people without underlying health issues under the age of 60, was 338 out of near 80,000 deaths.
That is for under-60s. The figure drops to less than 50 in under-40s
My view that it is not killing young people in ratio to total deaths is backed up by the statistics.
116 Posted 14/01/2021 at 19:16:22
Whilst those who are young and healthy are less at risk of death, they can still infect, they can still suffer bad long-term effects. Irrespective of age, everyone of us is deserving of a good and healthy life not cut short because of a societal perspective on ageism.
So what if the young are not succumbing in the same numbers? That's great but it's not helping those who are and those who are left with continuing effects. People are dying out there, not statistics.
117 Posted 14/01/2021 at 19:19:45
Go back and read ALL my posts on this thread
118 Posted 14/01/2021 at 19:28:45
Dying with the virus or it being "Mentioned on the death certificate" (NHS' words, not mine), is not the same as the virus being the cause of death.
119 Posted 14/01/2021 at 19:28:54
120 Posted 14/01/2021 at 19:30:31
You have to ask yourself, how many more deaths are missing from that stat.
If a hospital/doctor can blame a weak heart, even though an individual my have survived with said weak heart for many years and dies within days of catching Covid, that stat may be a fair bit higher.
121 Posted 14/01/2021 at 19:31:21
122 Posted 14/01/2021 at 19:37:10
I'm not quite sure what you mean there. Are you are implying that there is no time to ascertain a cause of death but there is time to append Covid to the certificate?
If you are and if that's the case, then that is not an accurate cause of death that should be quoted.
123 Posted 14/01/2021 at 19:41:51
This was the explanation given to me over the phone by a doctor who had treated a good friend who passed away with complications due to the virus. It can happen in a week, a month or longer.
124 Posted 14/01/2021 at 19:42:18
"The death is either due to the virus or it isn't."
That's a bit simplistic. If a drunk driver dies in a car crash, the alcohol, his tolerance of it, his car, the other driver, the road, the weather, etc could all be factors that somehow or other contributed.
Some people have lingering effects of Covid-19 for months. In and of itself, the lingering effects may not kill them, but in conjunction with something else, it may. So people will argue about it either way but it is definitely a relevant factor to consider.
125 Posted 14/01/2021 at 19:42:39
127 Posted 14/01/2021 at 19:49:25
"Everyone has inherent weaknesses..."
128 Posted 14/01/2021 at 19:50:54
Well done to MK for swiftly and accurately correcting his appalling mis-information.
129 Posted 14/01/2021 at 19:51:19
Your plea for accuracy seems to be a desperate attempt to not recognize the bulk of excess deaths as attributable to Covid-19. While there may be some fraction getting placed in the Covid-19 column that may belong elsewhere, the difference is not enough to save your position on this matter.
130 Posted 14/01/2021 at 19:52:54
131 Posted 14/01/2021 at 19:57:31
But so what? As others have said, that single point is isolation tells us close to zero about the spread of the disease or the risks to the population more generally.
Even if it wasn't your intention, your sweeping statement about a bad cold is the kind of comment that perpetuates dangerous ideas. Your subsequent comments implied you thought this crisis was being blown out of proportion. If that's not the case, I apologise.
132 Posted 14/01/2021 at 20:07:08
133 Posted 14/01/2021 at 20:08:47
If I find time to dig some of them out I can send them to you personally but otherwise I'll hold them back until TW should ever feel it appropriate to open up a focussed (non-football) thread (unlikely as that is).
134 Posted 14/01/2021 at 20:12:23
You either understand and acknowledge it.
Or you don't.
135 Posted 14/01/2021 at 20:16:56
136 Posted 14/01/2021 at 20:22:54
138 Posted 14/01/2021 at 20:25:38
A death certificate will state the cause of death in the opinion of the certifying doctor. If this is directly attributable to Covid and it's believed that death would not have occurred in its absence, Covid is the cause. "Mentioning" Covid on the death certificate as opposed to clearly including its effects in the process of death is not the same.
We are being presented with daily death figures that include "Mention" of Covid on the death certificate, or of the deceased having have had a positive test within 60 days. This is misleading and serves to maximize the implication of the virus IMO.
"...but in conjunction with something else it may".
It's not simplistic if Covid did not cause the death. It is possible to die in a road accident as say, a diabetic. There may be slightly reduced circulation due to the diabetes. Doesn't mean the diabetes was the cause of death if the circulatory reduction was not critical.
My point is – headline Covid death numbers are being presented in a manner that implies Covid itself is directly killing people as the primary cause of death. To count having a positive test within 60 days as a "Covid death" when there is no mention of such in the mechanism of death on the certificate, is questionable.
Who knows? It's more important that the process is correct than whether everyone is doing the same thing.
139 Posted 14/01/2021 at 20:28:03
I had a quick run through this thread. I didn't read any posts denying Covid.
As I say, it was a quick run-through, I may have missed it. Who is denying Covid?
140 Posted 14/01/2021 at 20:30:04
141 Posted 14/01/2021 at 20:32:14
So it's OK to simply label as a "Covid death" and move on? How about labelling as "Unresolved" due to lack of resources... which would be the truth in such circumstance. You are basically condoning political labelling as valid in the absence of evidence. Unbelievable.
"Your plea for accuracy seems to be a desperate attempt to not recognize the bulk of excess deaths as attributable to Covid-19."
142 Posted 14/01/2021 at 20:33:00
Can we get Martin Mason to post verifying links every time he talks utter tripe?
It might crash the website mind.
143 Posted 14/01/2021 at 20:33:27
That would mean you would have to form a balanced, rather than a futile view.
144 Posted 14/01/2021 at 20:35:09
If the cap fits.
145 Posted 14/01/2021 at 20:35:56
You either understand and acknowledge it.
Or you don't."
There's comorbidity defined on the death certificate as being part of the process of death.
Then there's mention of a positive test within the previous 60 days - not the same thing.
Is this distinction made in the headline Covid death figures?
146 Posted 14/01/2021 at 20:37:22
147 Posted 14/01/2021 at 20:47:23
First off, Everton are finally looking like a team of footballers who care. Ace, this bodes well. Football is supposed to be entertainment, and what we're seeing from the blues looks to be getting somewhere near that.
Secondly, I've been living behind the Iron Curtain for the last 10 years and I can tell you that since this nonsense kicked-off, I haven't really seen anything here to substantiate the hogwash served up by the UK media.
I feel that Will Mabon and Thomas Richards are doing their best to figure out what is going on, and to be honest, I side with them on this topic. Their posts are well-balanced, well-reasoned and invite debate. I haven't once seen anyone from "the same camp" try to bluntly ram what are unfortunately dubbed as "conspiracy theories" down anyone's throat.
It's not valid to use regurgitated news statements from the government/mass media to refute their arguments. I'm not anyone to tell anyone else what to do, but –here goes anyway– maybe turning off the idiot box, steering away from mass media and then putting some independent study into what's going on full-stop might give you greater scope to challenge those that are prepared to put in the hard yards.
Michael Kenrick, do you really think that a website named "fullfacts.org" has the full facts? The BBC cracks me up with its link at the bottom of the news pages: "Why you can trust BBC News". I can't be alone in being raised not to trust those that blag you for their trust and that's me being honest, trust me, I am not lying.
Grand irony involved here, but I do echo what Graham Mockford said (#135). None of us will ever know what is going on, so let's not fall out about it.
148 Posted 14/01/2021 at 20:53:30
Do those on here with scientific or medical knowledge know if this is a standard way of attributing lethality to a serious plague or disease?
149 Posted 14/01/2021 at 20:59:02
"I've been living behind the Iron Curtain for the last 10 years." Do they even have websites in the pre-1990 Warsaw Pact era time zone you travelled from? That apart, welcome to the future.
151 Posted 14/01/2021 at 21:05:17
Thankfully, just ToffeeWeb – the only source of "news" any of us need.
Edit: @Tony Hill and to supplement what Graham Mockford said below:
"In the early stages of the epidemic, deaths were often attributed to ‘PUO (a pyrexia of unknown origin) but later deaths were recorded as ‘Spanish Flu or, more commonly, ‘influenza'."
Stats and data sets can be doctored to suit any agenda, so not sure what the craic is with ebola and this current "PUO".
152 Posted 14/01/2021 at 21:06:38
The scientifically accepted way of measuring pandemic deaths is excess deaths, ie, deaths over and above the statistically expected number of deaths.
153 Posted 14/01/2021 at 21:13:58
154 Posted 14/01/2021 at 21:20:05
I am pretty lazy when getting the news. BBC, ITV, Reuters and a bit of the byline times are my usual sources. Oh and the TV gold which is CNN covering the Trump insurrection.
What news sources do you use to get the full picture of what is going on?
155 Posted 14/01/2021 at 21:21:49
The new definition meant a REDUCTION of CV-19 related deaths by 5,377 on recorded numbers at that time. Read more here. It also helps explain the confusion some are making about the 28 or 60 day positive test thingy:
The Office for National Statistics made a study on the QUALITY of mortality data in which they acknowledged:
* initially, the time taken to register a death decreased due to several factors, including a reduction in coroner certified deaths (because they take longer and the system was overwhelmed)
* in the first wave, with inquests virtually halted and less coroner certified deaths reported, the slack was taken up with doctor certified deaths
* one consequence of this was that the mean number of health conditions mentioned on CV-19 related death certificates is greater than on non-CV-19 deaths. ONS concluded that certifiers showed GREATER CARE to include all relevant information and conditions than is normally the case, rather than some kind of deception to inflate the numbers as some wish to imply
There is more detail for anyone with the mind to read it here:
Again from an official organ of government, gov.uk, you have the following report quoting WHO on the complexity of defining a CV-19 death. WHO consider:
'A COVID-19 death is defined for surveillance purposes as a death resulting from a clinically compatible illness in a probable or confirmed COVID-19 case, unless there is a clear alternative cause of death that cannot be related to COVID-19 disease (e.g. trauma).'
Comorbidity. You either understand and acknowledge it. Or you don't.
156 Posted 14/01/2021 at 21:25:50
157 Posted 14/01/2021 at 21:26:55
Not necessarily as of course you could have a number of factors in a given year. For instance, a particularly cold winter may cause more deaths. The biggest excess deaths figures in recent history were during the World War 2. It doesn't tell you exactly how they died but why they died.
Looking at 2020 data, it's a fairly safe assumption that the excess deaths are overwhelmingly Covid-related. In many cases, this will be people with comorbidities but, of course, the bottom line is that they still died earlier than expected.
158 Posted 14/01/2021 at 21:28:25
I know there'd be uproar and it would be political kryptonite but sport is important to the nation.
I'd be happy for them to go ahead of me.
159 Posted 14/01/2021 at 21:28:56
160 Posted 14/01/2021 at 22:00:51
Alas, I'll repeat, and add to, my conclusion from my first post on this thread:
None of us will ever know what is going on, what went on, or what will happen. Let's respect each other's opinions and try not to fall out about it. Whatever is going on is certainly no good for anyone, not least us common folk.
As I'm sure we'll all agree, there is already far too much division in society – especially amongst those of the same feather. This is a concerted effort, and works hand-in-hand with the confusion tactics peddled by the Mainstream Media.
George Orwell put it mighty fine:
"If there was hope, it must lie in the proles, because only there, in those swarming disregarded masses, eighty-five percent of the population of Oceania, could the force to destroy the Party ever be generated. The Party could not be overthrown from within. Its enemies, if it had any enemies, had no way of coming together or even of identifying one another. Even if the legendary Brotherhood existed, as just possibly it might, it was inconceivable that its members could ever assemble in larger numbers than twos and threes. Rebellion meant a look in the eyes, an inflection of the voice; at the most, an occasional whispered word. But the proles, if only they could somehow become conscious of their own strength, would have no need to conspire. They need only to rise up and shake themselves like a horse shaking off flies. If they chose they could blow the Party to pieces tomorrow morning. Surely sooner or later it must occur to them to do it."
@Rob Dolby (#154),
If you, or anyone else, is really interested in seeking more balanced situation reportss or have any questions at all regarding Russia etc., then you are free to get my email address from Michael or Lyndon and I'll do my best to help out wherever I can.
161 Posted 15/01/2021 at 01:11:19
I delight in being an Everton Supporter and I am disappointed about the postponement of the Villa game... However, I am actually looking forward to a relaxed weekend free from the panic and nerves I suffer through most Blues games.
Could someone wake me up when ToffeeWeb gets back to football, Everton play again and TWMEDIC is no longer the major source for all things "Covid".
162 Posted 15/01/2021 at 01:54:33
163 Posted 15/01/2021 at 06:42:59
If West Ham win two comparatively straightforward home games this week they will suddenly be level with us.
Looking down on Klopp or sideways at Moyes... not quite the same feeling is it?
164 Posted 15/01/2021 at 08:39:06
I disagree with Christian's generalisation at 160. Some of us do have relevant knowledge and experience to understand the scientific aspects and some people are doing a very good job of disseminating some of it. (Some, however, are very ably demonstrating that a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing.)
Personally, I'm gutted our game is postponed. Without it, my weekend won't be stress-free (I'm working) and a useful distraction is not available. I tend to believe in momentum and I am worried that it will be harder to get things going again when we resume the League games nearly 2 weeks from now.
I don't have a crystal ball that tells me all our players will be fit and available when we end up playing our postponed games. I'd rather we had played Man City and Aston Villa with our relatively limited absentees offset by their Covid cases and lack of prep time. To me, it's "a bird in the hand versus two in the bush" scenario. We just don't know we will be better off for having had these games postponed.
165 Posted 15/01/2021 at 09:16:14
I dont think Thomas Richards initial comments were that far wide - in defending his own initial remarks it looked like he was defending the points people thought he made.
In his statement about how ‘less dangerous the virus is for those under 60, under 50, under 40 etc is factually correct and he even said ‘without trivialising the virus and that the smaller number of 338 was still too many.
Thomas, in reiterating the above and stating “I can safely say, with 100% accuracy, not all deaths recorded are related to covid19” it did look like you cared less about the pandemic. I havent noticed any football related discussions you have been involved in so I have no idea about your ‘rep Im just trying to clear something up I thought was skewed.
Its obviously a highly charged topic and one I havent publicly engaged in at all until I saw Martin Masons abhorrent statements delivered as ‘facts.
Its interesting how debate on platforms such as this can develop. If Im wrong it doesnt matter but it highlighted to me as a new poster (Ive followed TW for years) how little information we sometimes get from a comment, when you dont see the person making it or how its delivered.
Jay Wood, I always enjoy your posts and thanks for the link on mortality rate.
Id certainly be interested and like to meet many of the contributors at one of the TW gatherings, if we ever get out again :-/
Love the site and may contribute further, but not on this topic - and if I can manage to avoid engaging with those that beat their own negative agenda drum regardless of whats happening with our great club on and off the pitch!
Stay safe blues! UTFT
166 Posted 15/01/2021 at 12:22:58
People post based on emotion last night.Understandable given the continuous media focus.
Always best to read all posts before the emotion kicks in.
I repeat what I posted initially yesterday.
"I AM NOT TRIVIALISING THE SITUATION"
My point is.
Out of over 3 million positive tests in UK the total deaths of people under the age of 40 is fifty in total.
When you look at under 30s in same bracket it drops to around 20 in total.
Suicide and self harm figures for young people in the last 12 months has rocketed.
Drug abuse amongst young people is at record levels over the last 12 months.
Counselling services for young people cant keep up with the demand over the last 12 months.
Do the figures justify putting young peoples lives on hold?
I believe you can educate the young people to not go anywhere near vulnerable family and friends.
Put all the effort and finance into shielding the vulnerable.
That goes without saying.
171 Posted 15/01/2021 at 13:18:01
It is undoubtedly the case that Premier League clubs do not take cups like the FA Cup and the League Cup anywhere near as seriously as used to be the case. This is evidenced by the readiness of Premier League clubs to field weak sides for those cup competitions. In this respect, Premier League clubs are probably more accepting of carrying on with a cup tie with a second-string team, than they are playing a Premier League game with a second-string team.
Comparing the cancellation of Aston Villa vs Everton in the Premier League to the non-cancellation of Aston Villa vs Liverpool in the FA Cup is like comparing chalk with cheese.
174 Posted 15/01/2021 at 13:55:29
Since the direct cause of the postponement was Covid-19, it's hardly a quantum leap for that to become the focus of the thread. Those of you who don't like that had best look away.
Those of you posting 'alternative' views (let's call them that), and implying that the rest of us are swallowing some government or mainstream media bullshit need to put up their sources so the rest of us at least have the opportunity to do some fact-checking.
Interesting that, so far only Ian, Jay and I have put up any links... nothing from Martin Mason, Christian Yates, Steve Carse or Will Mabon. Don't be shy. Here's your chance to put the rest of us straight. But only if you provide your sources, please.
175 Posted 15/01/2021 at 14:14:01
If, for instance, a person gets admitted to hospital with a bad stomach and dies from a seizure whilst in hospital, there would have to be an enquiry as to why that patient died from something different to what they were admitted for. This could potentially be hospital malpractice.
However, if they die from something that is different to what they were admitted for, and it “could” have been covid related - and they have tested positive within the last 28 days, it is easier for the coroner to put covid on the death certificate as this will ensure there is no enquiry into the death. Therefore there is no risk to the reputation of the hospital.
Therefore, there will be deaths that are marked as covid that werent actually anything to do with covid. Not loads, but definitely some.
176 Posted 15/01/2021 at 17:28:54
I think Thomas Richards makes a very good point about how we have impacted young peoples lives when it is not they who are effected by this at scale. Whether you agree with this or not, it is a valid perspective. Protect the vulnerable should be the absolute priority. It is what we do with other illness.
Every death is sad and unfortunate, but then every death by anything is. There are other diseases and viruses out there that we live and cope with as a human race and we will with this one.
And in my opinion, the media has whipped up a frenzy. But in honesty they do about everything these days. We live in a very outraged society. One fit for Kopite mentality.
You'll have to excuse me; as I said on the Man City thread, I am a bit raw on this subject. As we take our eye of the ball anything non-Covid related, I am going to the hospital this evening to pick up a very close immediate family member (not an old aged one), who has just had surgery for cancer. I lost my mother at 59 and my father at 63 to the same horrible disease.
450 people a day, on average, die and will continue to die of cancer in the UK long after this virus is contained. And it impacts people of all age groups more dispersed than Covid.
Sorry. I said I was raw and I know I probably should have refrained.
177 Posted 15/01/2021 at 19:52:08
Thomas Richards makes a very good point about how we have impacted young people's lives when it is not they who are affected by this at scale. Whether you agree with this or not, it is a valid perspective.
The perverseness of the argument is that it ignores the fact that it is the younger segment who are actually by default, spreading the disease and infecting others more vulnerable; to them, it may not be lethal but can be severe in its effects.
To say "protect the vulnerable" is impossible without large scale vaccination having been carried out, given that you cannot isolate the 10 million over 60s (plus the at-risk others) for the duration of the pandemic, which will rumble on... killing many many more.
Here in New Zealand, they have successfully (for now) hit the pause button and isolated the virus and stopped community spread, but they know any outbreak still has the potential to decimate the country – there is no immunity. Mass vaccination will not begin until the middle of the year, when they have assessed the best vaccine to use in their opinion. It's a gamble with people's lives that circumstances have afforded an opportunity to consider.
But in Europe, USA and other regions, the focus has to be on stopping the spread and limiting the deaths in the meantime. Sadly this means that a society has to adopt measures that impact all because this disease is not age-related in infection, however, but age-related in impact. To ignore that is to ignore the responsibility of care to others. The best way to protect is to prevent in the first place. We all have that responsibility.
178 Posted 15/01/2021 at 20:06:59
"The perverseness of the argument is that it ignores the fact that it is the younger segment who are actually by default, spreading the disease and infecting others more vulnerable."
Do you have evidence to validate that? Or is it guess work.
179 Posted 15/01/2021 at 20:46:33
It's not guess work. The precise data on transmission rates of different demographics are not clear because they are so hard to obtain. But if young people were not a key part in transmission, the rates of infection couldn't possibly be this high. Look at the impact of schools being open/closed. I work in a University, and have clear cases of asymptomatic transmission.
So, some of the evidence is circumstantial – strong data for a disease with such rapid transmission and variable symptoms are extremely hard to obtain – but if you are suggesting that the young should be allowed to get on with things, we'll have to disagree. The rate of transmission – and therefore risk to the vulnerable – is influenced by all of us. I can't see how anyone can see the data we do have and reach any different conclusion.
180 Posted 15/01/2021 at 21:27:54
I agree, Stuart. We are all part of the transmission. My point was the young people are being blamed disproportionately.
Before lockdown, I visited a few pubs I use regularly. Every one of them chocka with mIddle aged to elderly customers. Betting shop next door was the same.
Are they immune to transmission?
181 Posted 15/01/2021 at 21:38:10
182 Posted 15/01/2021 at 21:43:12
Meant to ask in last post. Are you for or against the university you work in in closing down due to Covid?
183 Posted 15/01/2021 at 22:24:32
Look, I don't really want to get too much into this. I don't really disagree with many views on this on either end of the spectrum less those who deny it / consider it a conspiracy. It's real and here. But I do feel there is a place for sensible debate and challenging the hysteria.
I was trying to say is that is in line with some of Thomas's sentiment: I agree with the view that the younger generation has been hit hard and that there are other causes of death, illness, disease and problems in society that we have taken our eye off and should be concerned about.
I'll leave it there. Just watched the Mi Chiamo Francessco Totti documentary again. Well worth a watch. Now onto Diego Maradona (again) and will wrap the evening up with Howard's Way!
184 Posted 15/01/2021 at 22:33:12
Probably worn itself out now, this thread.
All the best.
185 Posted 15/01/2021 at 22:42:50
That one made me fall down the stairs into my bomb shelter.
186 Posted 15/01/2021 at 22:48:48
Whatever I feel about closing, what I am fully against is dithering, followed by last-minute government decisions which place staff under enormous pressure. Decisions made by people who know nothing about how schools or universities work. Hence the wine consumption...
187 Posted 15/01/2021 at 22:51:31
Christine, I wish the UK had the same leadership as NZ. We probably wouldn't be having this discussion about a postponed football match.
188 Posted 15/01/2021 at 22:58:55
Christine, apologies if I come across as a smart arse. I had no intention of doing that.
Rob, no I wouldn't. But that isn't typical of Covid-19.
I have always depended on a healthy diet, plenty of excercise and trust my immune system to cope.
189 Posted 15/01/2021 at 23:03:37
Then when illness comes your way, you stand a better chance of fighting it. I agree!
190 Posted 15/01/2021 at 23:09:37
Agree mate. Drop of the vino for me. That's my treat.
Been a great, informative thread this one.
I know its off topic generally but it is great that the site managers allowed the debate to flow.
191 Posted 15/01/2021 at 23:22:47
It took 9 months of severe lockdowns in Australia (well, Victoria) to bring the virus under control. And it was never at the levels it was at in the UK.
I don't think the Australian or NZ response was ever an option in the UK. But that's a long way from saying the UK response has been appropriate. If you're overwhelming your health system, then you've demonstrably got it wrong.
192 Posted 15/01/2021 at 23:33:22
A healthy diet and keep yourself fit sounds like something Dominic Cummings would advise Boris to preach to the great unwashed.
Maybe Rashford should put that on his Twitter feed to all those disadvantaged young people who haven't got a pot to piss in, "Get a healthy diet and stay fit."
Cold fish, a lack of compassion, empathy and respect to all of the people who have suffered and passed away from this virus. Let's just hope that the NHS follows a healthy diet and stays fit.
Maybe wearing tin foil under a hat will also help everyone?
193 Posted 15/01/2021 at 23:35:24
And in countries like Germany, it is actually an active and funded aspect of their health service.
No lack of empathy from me. Just a recognition that people also pass away from other things and will continue to do so when this storm blows over.
194 Posted 15/01/2021 at 23:42:23
Human lives must be at stake on both sides of that nasty equation, surely.
195 Posted 16/01/2021 at 03:41:26
A couple of important things to consider. Firstly, evolution of the virus (as with any other evolution) is a numbers game. The more generations of it there are, the more chances that there will be nastier versions in just the right place at the right time to flourish.
As things stand, there is probably still less than 10 per cent of the population who have contracted the virus. If we simply allow the virus to spread unchecked in the younger age groups, we are rolling the dice that something worse for all of us won't be the next variant rising to prominence.
Secondly, there is the related issue of whether or not people recovered from infection have persistent immunity. Part of the trick that will be required to make the most of widespread immunisation is getting everyone immune at the same time so that the virus dies out in the population.
Human nature being what it is, plenty of youngsters will probably consider it safe for them to visit vulnerable relatives if they have had Covid themselves, and how will you get the large percentages of them required onboard for vaccination if you've previously told them they can pretty much ignore this virus? That simply won't equate to many of them.
Like a lot of legislation, unfortunately, the one-size-fits-all approach is the only sensible way to handle this virus. Everybody simply has to get the message that they have an important responsibility to suppress the spread of the virus as much as possible.
196 Posted 16/01/2021 at 04:51:33
Actually I have a soft spot for Sheffield Wednesday. There are some teams that I would like to see come back to the Premier League and they are one of them. This seems crazy but I see them as a "real" team, with real fans.
We seem to have too many teams that I just see as intruders, eg, Palace, Bournemouth, Watford and a whole host of others. I am sure there are many that rightly disagree.
197 Posted 16/01/2021 at 06:51:12
198 Posted 16/01/2021 at 07:26:51
I feel the same about Sheffield Wednesday. It feels they should be a Premier League club even if the reality is they probably haven't been for 20 years!
Same with Nottingham Forest for me!
Steve Brown (good name!!),
100% right! This weekend is now a nothing weekend! No game to look forward too is grim!
199 Posted 16/01/2021 at 08:18:56
Silly post from you there but I will answer.
As a regular contributor to food banks, both in goods and time, you are preaching to the converted.
Do you do anything about the atrocity of child poverty?
Or do you just like to talk about it?
200 Posted 16/01/2021 at 08:35:17
I guess it is down to generational experiences.
In the context of my (to date) life time, I look at the league this morning and I see Fulham; mid to lower tier club. Leicester, Wolves and West Brom; yo-yo clubs, although I recall Wolves in dire straights in the early 80s - bottom tier with padlocks on the gates of Molineux at one point. Likewise Middlesborough. Sheffield United very much a tier 2 / tier 3 club as have Sunderland been in the main.
Even Chelsea were an average club that had a spell in tier 2. Newcastle interestingly are back where they were in my childhood despite that spike in the early 90s, which combined with the advent of Sky Sports and elevated them to Manchester United like status (in their own supporters' minds).
Interesting subject in its own right but thought I'd use the tier system to keep it aligned to the thread!
201 Posted 16/01/2021 at 09:06:17
202 Posted 18/01/2021 at 23:42:44
Thats top flight English football. No place for Chelsea, Palace, Coventry, Norwich, Yeovil, Exeter or the Norwegian favourites, “Liverpool”.
203 Posted 18/01/2021 at 23:59:34
And thanks Michael 174 for allowing the space to vent and laying out some reasonable expectations for the interaction.
204 Posted 19/01/2021 at 09:48:23
Add Your Comments
In order to post a comment, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.
Or Sign up as a ToffeeWeb Member — it's free, takes just a few minutes and will allow you to post your comments on articles and Talking Points submissions across the site.